I walked away from religion when I was 12. While it took me almost another 2 decades to become and accept that I am an atheist, I have basically lived without god for a long time. In fact, I’ve been an atheist for about 9 years and in that time, I have managed to refrain from killing anyone, stealing anything, cheating on my husband, and many other bad behaviors.

I do still drink copious amounts of coffee and swear a lot, but hey, nobody’s perfect. :P

I’ve met christians who have said they would kill, rape, steal and basically go on a rampage without god watching their every move. I’m very glad those amoral people are afraid of burning in hell because they have no moral compass like most of us do. Those few people who think they need god to be good need to stay religious. They have a screw loose.

Apparently research is finding that being moral is part of our evolution. Recently I’ve been hearing of studies that show morality in other animals. And awhile ago I read about E. Coli and how it sometimes sacrifices itself for the good of the colony. Basically, working within the framework of your given society is beneficial in fundamental ways, and that’s been with us and many other creatures for eons.

Still, religions think they have some kind of monopoly on morality. But if you actually read their “holy” books, you’ll find rampant murder, religious wars, rape, killing of women and children, wholesale slaughter of people who believed differently, and on and on. Recently I read the first part of God Hates You, Hate Him Back by CJ Werleman which goes through every book of the bible. I was reminded how much god hates everyone, even his chosen people, and how much he kills people and has his people kill people, children and animals. It’s heart-warming mind-numbing. That’s the main gist of the old testament. (the other main theme is how the chosen people aren’t worshiping god correctly, how they are worshiping other gods – wait, isn’t there just one? even god admits there are others! – and generally being bad followers and need to be punished. It’s very loving crazy-making to read it.) Read the rest of this entry »

I am reading several books right now (I have them all listed in the left sidebar). One is called The God Virus and I just started it the other day. On page 18, Darrel W. Ray describes an experiment. I think I’ve heard of it before, but I thought I’d share it with you because it shows how religion attacks the critical thinking skills of the mind. As Mr. Ray says, it leaves the skill intact for other religions but disables critical thinking about one’s own religion. It really is like a virus of the mind.

Here’s the experiment as explained in the book:

You have a serious conversation with a deeply christian friend. Your friend is intelligent, well educated and knowledgeable. You agree to record the session. The topic is islam. During the session, you discuss that mohammed was a self-appointed prophet and that he claimed he talked to allah and the angels. He wrote a book that he claimed was infallible, and he flew from Jerusalem to heaven on a horse.

During the conversation, you agree that mohammed was probably delusional to think he could talk to god. You agree that the koran was clearly written by mohammed and not allah. It is ludicrous for him to claim that he is the last prophet and that all others are false. Neither you nor your friend can believe that he flew to heaven, let alone on a horse. It all sounds too crazy, and you both agree it is difficult to see how someone could believe such a religion. At the end of the conversation, you say that muslims did not choose their religion; they were born into it. Anyone who was exposed to both christianity and islam would see that christianity is the true religion. Read the rest of this entry »

128993549193708521More to the point, why do Jews and Muslims hate pigs, since god doesn’t exist. But for the sake of argument, let’s look at the bible and quran to see what they say about the other white meat.

Question: Are pigs native to the Middle East, then? If no decent jew or muslim could eat them, why were they raised and by whom?

God seems quite fickle about what were were to eat:

  • Adam and Eve are supposed to eat a vegan diet: Genesis 1:29: And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
  • Noah and his sons can eat any living thing, but they have to drain the blood first: Genesis 9:2-4: And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

That didn’t last long because in Deuteronomy and Leviticus he gets into all the things that are forbidden. Here I’ll highlight the references to swine.

  • Leviticus 11:7: And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
  • Deuteronomy 14:8: And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase. Read the rest of this entry »

Women-in-islamic-dressAnother abhorrent law has passed in Afghanistan, showing the barbarism of islam.

  • It is now legal for shia men to deny food and sustenance to their wives if they refuse to obey their husband’s sexual demands.
  • Fathers and grandfathers have full guardianship over the children
  • Women must ask permission from their husbands to work.
  • A rapist can avoid prosecution by paying ‘blood money’ to a girl who was injured when he raped her.
  • “Tamkeen is the readiness of the wife to submit to her husband’s reasonable sexual enjoyment, and her prohibition from going out of the house, except in extreme circumstances, without her husband’s permission. If any of the above provisions are not followed by the wife she is considered disobedient.”

Apparently in a bid for votes in the upcoming election, Hamid Karzai has basically sold the rights of women to gain power. The election is Thursday, August 20. But from what I can see, women will lose as long as the country is islamic.

BurqaThere is a lot of debate about the burqa and its links to oppression today.  To state my stance immediately, I dislike the burqa for everything—and I mean everything—that it stands for.  I however, do not say we should ban it, but complete criticism of it should be brought forth.  I have an issue with the current struggle in the debate; I can see where the anti-burqa argument is coming from…  I however, have no clue where the pro-burqa argument seems to get its legs.

For those who wear the burqa “freely” the argument amounts to it being religious tradition.  They’re not oppressed, it’s their religious tradition and heritage and they’re proud of it.  For those not wearing the burqa, the defense is the Qur’an doesn’t actually enforce the burqa (they’re not being forced to wear it, and if they are being forced to wear it—it is the culture).

These arguments aren’t compatible—they’re contradictory.  The fact that they are contradictory is a sign of oppression itself.  Why do these women think that burqas are a part of their religion if they are not?  The banning of the burqa proposal is constantly referred to as an attack on the Islam religion, and yet, at the same time the same people are arguing that the burqa has nothing to do with the Islam religion itself but with oppressive cultures…  The argument contradicts itself even.

Perhaps we should inspect why people think the burqa is commanded by their religion.  I’m sure everybody is aware of commands to lower gazes, cover private parts and so forth.  The main aspect is covering the beauty, and that the traditional khimar would be extended to cover the bosom.  The Qur’an directly calls for a hijab, as Muhammad clarified on these parts and stated their meaning as covering all but the face and hands (although hey, I for one think the face is an incredibly beautiful part of the body).

But hold on now, do not take this into thinking that the Qur’an doesn’t say that women should cover their faces.  The niqab, or burqa, has the impression of being required in a later passage.  It’s a matter of interpretation, which one is it?  Typically the one that comes later as a general rule of all religions is the one that actually matters (which brings up the question why give it in the first place if it was just going to be labeled obsolete).  Even though the niqab rule comes later sequentially in the book (Surah al-Ahzab 59 for the niqab vs Surah an-Nur  31 for the hijab), chronologically it’s argued to be actually before…  There is a bunch more evidence for that as well though.

niqabThe issue here is that the Qur’an does indeed have the burqa as a requirement, even though it is supposedly rendered obsolete.  This rendering obsolete, however, is a matter of interpretation.  Along this, there are interpretations that the clothing is not required at all but rather more suggested by the prophet Muhammad…  This is contradictory, as Muhammad’s words are law under Islam religion, especially considering Muhammad clarified the rule as opposed to creating it anyways—overall it is simply trying to explain away oppressive doctrines by applying what they think is morally right to a book that is supposed to define what morals are.

But just a second here, most conclude that the burqa is not required but the hijab is.  What is the difference?  Is the hijab so much better?  I don’t think it is at all!  Under the common interpretation, the only parts of the body left uncovered are the face and the hands…  I’m sorry if you don’t find that nearly as oppressive as I do.  For that matter, from a book ordering nearly 96% of the body to be covered, is it not safe to assume that the rest should be as well?

Let’s get back to the debate that is occurring.  It is claimed that the anti-burqa movement is simply anti-Islamic (yet again, at the same time they conclude that the Qur’an doesn’t enforce the burqa…).  Is it really so hard to see why women and people in general associate the burqa with this oppressive structure that subjugates and confines women under the name of Islam?

All I see is that they are obscuring the fact that there are indeed pervasive and sexist propaganda in the Muslim communities for favor of these burqas.  Women are murdered for it even in the Western world, and giving a blind eye to that fact is—in my opinion—a completely uncaring and wrong action to do.  Let me ask you, why it is a “choice” to choose whether or not to get murdered and not a guaranteed right.

Do you know the real problem about the burqa is?  Why do so many women hate the burqa?  Can you differentiate between two burqa wearing women, even if you knew them personally?  When women wear the burqa, in a sense, it the most perverse kind of sexual objectification… that woman, is identified by absolutely nothing other than her gender: a shapeless, faceless, nameless woman and nothing more than that at all.

Perhaps a ban is needed, maybe just a temporary one though—one that enables women to escape if they need to from their oppression.  To allow them to get their voices and give them back their right to be human.  Have no mistake, many need help, and to ignore those pleas is perhaps the worst action to do by those who are free.

islam: the religion of peace

Excerpt from article by Sabina Amidi, special to the Jerusalem Post:

In a shocking and unprecedented interview, directly exposing the inhumanity of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s religious regime in Iran, a serving member of the paramilitary Basiji militia has told this reporter of his role in suppressing opposition street protests in recent weeks.

He has also detailed aspects of his earlier service in the force, including his enforced participation in the rape of young Iranian girls prior to their execution.

The interview took place by telephone, and on condition of anonymity. It was arranged by a reliable source whose identity can also not be revealed.

Founded by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979 as a “people’s militia,” the volunteer Basiji force is subordinate to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and intensely loyal to Khomeini’s successor, Khamenei.

Explaining how he had come to join the volunteer Basiji forces, he said his mother had taken him to them.

When he was 16, “my mother took me to a Basiji station and begged them to take me under their wing because I had no one and nothing foreseeable in my future. My father was martyred during the war in Iraq and she did not want me to get hooked on drugs and become a street thug. I had no choice,” he said.

He said he had been a highly regarded member of the force, and had so “impressed my superiors” that, at 18, “I was given the ‘honor’ to temporarily marry young girls before they were sentenced to death.”

In the Islamic Republic it is illegal to execute a young woman, regardless of her crime, if she is a virgin, he explained. Therefore a “wedding” ceremony is conducted the night before the execution: The young girl is forced to have sexual intercourse with a prison guard – essentially raped by her “husband.” Read the rest of this entry »

kurdish woman behind bars

First, let’s talk a little about Turkey.

Turkey is a secular democracy with no state religion. It’s a developed country and a regional power with close relationships to many other countries. The people are educated with a good life expectancy of 73 years. The men are better educated than the women but school is free and compulsory from ages 6-15. The reason there is a discrepancy for women is because in the southeastern provinces, Kurds and Arabs hold their traditional customs.

There is no state religion in Turkey and their constitution provides the freedom of religion and conscience but does not promote a religion. But here’s where things go downhill. 99% of the country is muslim. There are a few minority religious there too, and about 3.2% are irreligious or atheists. A poll in 2002 reported that 65% of the people believe “religion is very important.” Another poll in 2005 found that 95% of the citizens believe “there is a god.”

Here’s where it gets sickening. Honor killings in Turkey have been getting more common. The government estimated them at about 200 a year, half of all the murders committed in the country. So in 2005 Turkey changed the law so that honor killers would receive a life sentence instead of being able to get a reduced sentence, claiming provocation. Still, there is now about one honor killing a week in Istanbul, so it’s spreading into the modern cities as well.

Now a new phenomenon is brewing – honor suicides. Women are told to kill themselves so that no one has to go to prison for life for murdering them. Read the rest of this entry »